Live data from Hacker News

Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

wbur.org

81–90 of 149 posts

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#81
post #75
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose you can achieve happiness with a wire to the brain. Is there a good argument against doing this?

The same arguments against doing heroin?

Heroin (and the fact that it's a scarce commodity due to legislation first world countries) has the self-harm potential (needles can be used by addicts so many times they actually snap/collapsed veins/'cotton fever') along with social negatives (shared needles=>increased rates of transmittance of hep C and other maladies, petty crime, prostitution (which is a-okay by me if regulated, but addicts who resort to sex working as a means to sustain their habit often are subjected to violent situations) organized crime/gang warfare due to the market effects of prohibition effectively making powdered heroin high purity being incredibly valuable in a fairly transportable form). Nasal consumption can lead to deviated septums, decreased nasal mucosa production, etc (not limited to heroin, habitual insufflation of cocaine exhibits the same effects). Smoking heroin off foil surely can't be good for ones lungs, though I'm not sure specifically what pulmonary effects it would yield.

As long as electricity and the components/knowledge is commonly available, those sociological byproducts are more or less eliminated (though the self-injurious effects have analogous deleterious effects one could argue). Unlike heroin, where the side-effects are well-known (about two hundred years of opium usage in the west, ranging from laudanum in the 19th century among primarily the affluent women of society to Purdue's OxyContin(tm)). We know how mu-opioids are structured molecularly, the pharmacological behavior occurs as they bind to (primarily) mu-opioid receptors in the brain, etc). tDCS main risk factor is (as stated in the article) the fact that it's a fairly new science. Even if properly administered by trained neuroscientists/neurologists/technicians within the field, we're not aware of the long-term 10 year side-effects. The risks increase dramatically if an average Joe is half-informed and tries to administer (or modify) tDCS themselves.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#82
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a leap to say that suppressing doubt and fear makes people more rational. It could just as well make people more impulsive.

It's also a leap to say the world would be a better place. One person's version of rationality can be quite different to another's. Imagine of someone feels that the only rational thing for them to do is to do something "normally rational" people would find irrational- like kill your neighbour's dog because it's bark is keeping you up at night, but social pressures, anxiety and fear actually keep them in check from t…

Well, rationality doesn't exist in a vacuum. Those societal pressures are taken into account in a rational choice.

> Are psychopaths not a good indicator of what might happen if your self limiting emotions/thoughts were turned off?

Possibly? If your goal is the ultimate advancement of the self, then sociopathic tendencies might yield the best results. We've evolved to have strong emotions regarding our offspring and those of our tribe, because that's proven a beneficial strategy for the species, but that is, in some respect, to the detriment of the individual. Most of us are fine with this decision, because of our feelings regarding our and our future offspring, but if you have no care for family, friends or the species as a whole, then gaming the system for your own advancement is probably the rational choice.

There are interesting implications to your sentence though. The blogger explained the loss of (generally perceived as) negative emotions, but what if they were not put in a situation to notice, or were unable to because of the condition itself, a loss in what we generally perceive as positive emotions, such as empathy and sympathy? This of course assumes that there was some emotional state change, and it wasn't a placebo effect.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#83
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, interesting. I checked with my friend, and it turns out they had gotten mixed up. They were prescribed benzos, not beta blockers. What made you stop taking them? My friend has been making good progress without them, but still gets some rough days. And what supplements/medicines do you use, apart from phenibut? (To be clear, they've already spoken with a doctor, psychologist, consulted drugs.com listing of side ef…

I stopped taking them for two reasons. 1. I have an absurdly high tolerance to them (and almost all GABAergics, for that matter.) I always have, and also have an absurd alcohol tolerance. So, while clonazepam worked for me, I was taking roughly the maximum dosage designated for severe seizure disorders (I was taking 18mg/day, which if anyone is familiar with clonazepam, they'll know how absurd that is.) 2. I was star…

On the suggestion of someone here I tried Phenibut for sleep earlier this year. What I've found with it is that it works best taking it 4-5 days a week with 2-3 days off, otherwise my tolerance builds up. The first day I take it after a break is noticibly stronger and I could probably use a lower dose then (but I ended up just using 900mg all the time). I now do the same with Baclofen 20mg, which I prefer (but Phenibut is more effective for anxiety I hear since it is a weak baclofen plus a weak gabapentin). Anyway, if you want to try lower doeses and haven't tried this already and can go without for a couple of days a week that might work (you might need a longer break at first to clear it out).

Phenibut (and almost certainly Baclofen too) have some interactions with other medications; I had issues with diphenhydramine (numbness in mouth for 10 seconds or so after waking up; I didn't intend to take both, it didn't even seem like a good idea) and L-Theanine (mild asthma reaction, which I otherwise rarely get these days other than in the vicinity of certain cats). While not severe for me, they are the kind of things that could be severe and I think it is worth being careful with them. Withdrawal effects should be less severe with once a day usage due to the short half life (about 6 hours IIRC), but take it long enough without breaks, particularly at high dosage, and it can build up enough to cause withdrawal effects (but tapering when stopping will prevent those).

While I don't remember the details, I tried a benzo for sleep briefly after high school and found it effective only for a day or two. Between that and the potential side effects, I haven't tried them again since. I have a non-24 hour circadian rhythm and have had success with a combination of uridine monophosphate (150mg sublingual daily with maybe monthly breaks of a couple of days), Baclofen (20mg four or five days a week, at least two in a row off), and a quarter of a 5mg melatonin patch most days (I manage to forget it often enough to not need intentional breaks; at least monthly breaks of a couple of days would be a good idea). With this I've been able to avoid my sleep schedule shifting every day as it does without medication. My alertness and other issues during the day still vary quite a bit and are rarely all that good, but hopefully this will get better eventually.

Uridine monophosphate (or triacetyluridine, which is better absorbed from the digestive system but isn't usable sublingually) is also a higher risk in that it hasn't been as comprehensively studied as other things and it could have negative long term effects. I seem to need to take a high B vitamin supplement when I take it or get B vitamin deficiency symptoms (bright red around lips); even a 100% DV supplement doesn't prevent that. The combination of uridine, DHA, and choline is supposed to help with neural growth. I don't know if it would help with anxiety, but anything that helps with sleep seems like a possibility at least :/. It could potentially interact (negatively or otherwise) with things like autoimmune conditions.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#84

Neuroscientist here: Just listened to a talk from a reseacher who studied tDCS and tACS in human subjects, and found that IQ scores were actually going down relative to control groups. It's absolutely not clear what the appropriate protocols are, and behavioral outcomes could be incredibly sensitive to factors such as 1) electrode placement, 2) stimulation frequency, 3) amplitude, 4) direct or alternating current, et…

>> Neuroscientist here: Just listened to a talk from a reseacher who studied tDCS and tACS in human subjects, and found that IQ scores were actually going down relative to control groups.

So really, someone experimenting on their own could be considered more ethical than researchers doing it to other people ;-) This is really an area where having all the data is critical and that publication bias we keep reading about at HN can actually be harmful to people relying on published results. One could say "they shouldn't be doing that", but don't researchers want their results to be used for something, or is it just about publication?

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#85
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A quote from the reporter's blog [0]: "When the nice neuroscientists put the electrodes on me, the thing that made the earth drop out from under my feet was that for the first time in my life, everything in my head finally shut the fuck up." I'll be honest, that is a pretty compelling testimonial for many folks. [0]: http://www.lastwordonnothing.com/2012/02/09/better-living-th...

From that blog post: And then, finally, the main question: what role does doubt and fear play in our lives if its eradication actually causes so many improvements? Do we make more ethical decisions when we listen to our inner voices of self-doubt or when we’re freed from them? If we all wore these caps, would the world be a better place? That's a really interesting thought. Not so much "would the world be better", as…

Just to address the question of elimination of fear and doubt... This is fairly easy to draw out on a line. Alcohol does a pretty good job of eliminating fear and doubt, as well. There are other problems mixed in with alcohol use, but I spent many years drinking, and having fear and doubt removed from pretty much every interaction, every day. You can ask my friends and family what that was like. I agree though that it would be very interesting for studying decision making if tDCS could modify very specific features like fear or doubt from every individual in a group.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#86
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An opportunity which comes blind, and with your brain as the stakes strikes me as something more akin to "A Gamble". It might actually be an incredibly poor gamble too.

It's a gamble for those doing it. If you're willing to let them (and I don't see sufficient grounds on which to stop them) then it's pure upside for everyone else, as we learn the results. Very callously speaking, of course. And the upsides are much less when they're not thoroughly and scientifically recording their results, which they're probably not.

The thing is, you're assuming that the methodology employed by people acting as their own guinea pigs will yield useful data. I think this will be a case of GIGO, and the answers we need will eventually come from study, not personal sacrifice.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#87
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same arguments against doing heroin?

Heroin (and the fact that it's a scarce commodity due to legislation first world countries) has the self-harm potential (needles can be used by addicts so many times they actually snap/collapsed veins/'cotton fever') along with social negatives (shared needles=>increased rates of transmittance of hep C and other maladies, petty crime, prostitution (which is a-okay by me if regulated, but addicts who resort to sex wor…

If heroin was legal, safe, and free, I still wouldn't use it.

The state I would be in as a heroin addict has a large negative value in my current utility function. This negative value is so large that it swamps the positive value of being happy all the time. I suspect this just means I'm not entirely hedonistic.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#88

Neuroscientist here: Just listened to a talk from a reseacher who studied tDCS and tACS in human subjects, and found that IQ scores were actually going down relative to control groups. It's absolutely not clear what the appropriate protocols are, and behavioral outcomes could be incredibly sensitive to factors such as 1) electrode placement, 2) stimulation frequency, 3) amplitude, 4) direct or alternating current, et…

>> Neuroscientist here: Just listened to a talk from a reseacher who studied tDCS and tACS in human subjects, and found that IQ scores were actually going down relative to control groups. So really, someone experimenting on their own could be considered more ethical than researchers doing it to other people ;-) This is really an area where having all the data is critical and that publication bias we keep reading abou…

On the risk that I may sound to much like from the ivory tower but doing something out of the blue is not more ethical (why should it?). But you may end paralyzed and need help by other people, very clever. And the amount people at home can contribute to science is negleable. How much do all the at home car tuners contribute to new cars?! Is it ethical to built new superfast cars on your own ground so you one day can build a faster ambulance? Right, it is not. Just because this kind of research is somewhat new, it does not mean it is easy or you just have to invest sometime to revolutionize the world.

Somewhat parallel, people also critize WebMD. Obvoiusly, scientists want their finding to be used but in a reasonable matter, not without context and into the blue. And publications are (among scientists) are rendered not that important (and everyone knows that). It is just that you get judged by them, so you do them and as good as you can. As a software engineer you also at some point finish your project, although you could obtimize on it for ever.

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#89
The first 40 minutes of this week's "Invisibilia" touches on the effects transcranial magnetic stimulation had on a woman who lived with undiagnosed aspergers for most of her life.

> ALIX SPIEGEL, BYLINE: Until she was 54 years old, Kim (ph) was totally unaware that there were things in the world that she could not see.

> KIM: Everything that was intended in this went completely over my head, and now I saw it - completely missed the meaning of the whole thing until after the TMS. And then I saw the whole thing clearly.

http://www.npr.org/2016/07/07/485138695/invisibilia-an-exper...

(The TMS study "Kim" participated in took place at the same hospital that the co-author of this letter works, Beth Israel Deaconess.)

Re: Neuroscientists' Open Letter To DIY Brain Hackers

#90
A good idea would be to create a website were self experimenters can log their results, describe their setups, take tests and answer questionnaires. Similar to what erowid did for drugs back in the days - the self reported "trip reports".

Of course - warn people that it's dangerous, etc etc, but people are still going to do it so why not use that as 'volunteer' experimental data.

Post reply on HN